v CIR and CTA No L 22074 30 April 1965 Taxpayer Petition for Review Tenor of

V cir and cta no l 22074 30 april 1965 taxpayer

This preview shows page 60 - 62 out of 125 pages.

Philippine Guaranty Co. v. CIR and CTA, No. L-22074, 30 April 1965).Taxpayer: Petition for Review; Tenor of Finality of Assessment (2012) VIII. In the examination conducted by the revenue officials against the corporate taxpayer in 2010, the BIR issued a final assessment notice and demand letter which states: “It is requested that the above deficiency tax be paid immediately upon receipt hereof, inclusive of penalties incident to delinquency. This is our final decision based on investigation. If you disagree you may appeal this time, decision within thirty (30) days from receipt hereof, otherwise said deficiency tax assessment shall become final, executory and demandable.” The assessment was immediately appealed by the taxpayer to the Court of Tax Appeals, without filing its protest against the assessment and without a denial thereof by the BIR. If you were the judge, would you deny the petition for review filed by the taxpayer and consider the case as prematurely filed? Explain your answer. (5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:NO. The Petition for Review should not be denied. The case is an exception to the rule on exhaustion of administrative remedies. The BIR is estopped from claiming that the filing of the Petition for Review is premature because the taxpayer failed to exhaust all administrative remedies. The statement of the BIR in its Final Assessment Notice and Demand Letter led the taxpayer to conclude that only a final judicial ruling in his favor would be accepted by the BIR. The taxpayer cannot be blamed for not filing a protest against the Formal Letter of Demand with Assessment Notices since the language used and the tenor of the demand letter indicate that it is the final decision of the respondent on the matter. The CIR should indicate, in a clear and unequivocal language, whether his action on a disputed assessment constitutes his final determination thereon in order for the taxpayer concerned to determine when his or her right to appeal to the tax court accrues. Although there was no direct reference for the taxpayer to bring the matter directly to the CTA, it cannot be denied that the word “appeal” under prevailing tax laws refers to the filing of a Petition for Review with the CTA (Allied Bank vs. CIR, G.R. No. 175097, February 5, 2010).
Background image
Taxation Law Q&As (2007-2013)[email protected] [email protected] “Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige Page 61 of 125 Taxpayer: Prescription; Construction in Civil Cases (2010) I (a) True or False. In civil cases involving the collection of internal revenue taxes, prescription is construed strictly against the government and liberally in favor of the taxpayer. (1%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:True. (CIR v. BF Goodrich., Phils. Inc., G.R. No. 104171, Feb. 24, 1999; Phil.
Background image
Image of page 62

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 125 pages?

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture